Monday, December 19, 2016

JFK Assassination Secrets Scheduled for 2017 Release

by JOSH SANBURN | Time

The tortured path that began with a left turn onto Dealey Plaza on Nov. 22, 1963, will find its unlikely end point this October in College Park, Md. At a National Archives annex, the last remaining documents related to the assassination of President John F. Kennedy are being processed, scanned and readied for release.

For those who believe that the clues to who killed JFK are hidden somewhere deep inside the government’s files, this may be the last chance to find the missing pieces. Under the terms of the 1992 JFK Records Act–a result of Oliver Stone’s 1991 movie JFK, which revived fascination with the idea of a cover-up–the government was given 25 years to make public all related files. The time is up on Oct. 26, 2017. About 3,000 never-before-seen documents, along with 34,000 previously redacted files, are scheduled for release.

The files–many of which trace back to the House Select Committee on Assassinations from the 1970s–promise to be less about second shooters and grassy knolls and more about what the government, particularly the CIA, might have known about assassin Lee Harvey Oswald before Kennedy’s death. (The CIA declined to comment for this story, and the FBI did not respond to a request.) Already, the law has helped fill out one of the most significant periods of the 20th century, revealing information on military plots to invade Cuba; Kennedy’s plans to execute a withdrawal of U.S. forces from Vietnam; and the formation of the Warren Commission, which investigated the assassination.

According to the National Archives, the final batch includes information on the CIA’s station in Mexico City, where Oswald showed up weeks before JFK’s death; 400 pages on E. Howard Hunt, the Watergate burglary conspirator who said on his deathbed that he had prior knowledge of the assassination; and testimony from the CIA’s James Angleton, who oversaw intelligence on Oswald. The documents could also provide information on a CIA officer named George Joannides, who directed financial dealings with an anti-Castro group whose members had a public fight with Oswald on the streets of New Orleans in the summer of 1963.

“The records that are out there are going to fill out this picture,” says Jefferson Morley, an author who’s spent decades researching the assassination.

But Martha Murphy, who oversees the effort at the National Archives, warns that many of the documents may be of little value. She believes that any potentially revelatory information, like Oswald’s CIA file, has already been released–albeit with redactions (that text will be restored for the new release). Most of the trove was deemed “not believed relevant” by the independent Assassination Records Review Board (ARRB) in the 1990s. Still, John Tunheim, who chaired the ARRB, says “something that was completely irrelevant in 1998 may look more tantalizing today.”

For curious observers, even irrelevant documents are better than nothing–and nothing is still a possibility. The law says that if an agency doesn’t want certain files made public, it can appeal to the President, who could decide to hold them back after all. That has prompted almost two dozen authors, academics and former ARRB members to write to the White House counsel urging that all documents be released.

“We’re at the final chapter of JFK disclosure,” Morley says. “Sometimes I think we’re going to win. Sometimes I think it’s a fool’s errand. But we’re going to find out.” [END]

Despite
the fact that sources at the National Archives and Records
Administration (NARA) who have seen the documents say there is no
smoking gun (Martha Murphy says as much above), and that the Assassination Records Review Board (ARRB) who
also reviewed the documents in the 1990s and reiterated then that there is no
smoking gun, conspiracy advocates cling to the belief that proof of
Oswald’s innocence lies within.

What
do you think will happen when the conspirati discover that the
documents were largely withheld because they contained information that was
considered “security classified” or to protect personal privacy, tax and
grand jury information, or “because information in the document reveals
the identity of an unclassified confidential source,” as NARA officials
who have seen the documents have told us?

More
importantly, what do you think will happen when some documents are
petitioned to be withheld indefinitely because they reveal living
sources or ongoing intelligence methods?Let
me guess: Conspiracy fans will cry foul and continue to claim what
they’ve always claimed in spite of evidence to the contrary—that the
cover-up continues.

Let's face it, if the millions of pages of documents that are already available (many of them now online), and have been available for the better part of 50 years, haven't convinced conspiracy advocates that their charges of conspiracy in the JFK case are false - nothing will.Year
after year, we’re treated to a litany of unsubstantiated and in many
cases irrational “reasons” why we’re supposed to ignore the fact that
fifty-three years ago a disgruntled sociopath left his rifle behind on the
sixth floor of his workplace along with three spent cartridges, fled
the scene, armed himself with his own 38-caliber revolver, then used it
to murder a police officer who stopped to question him, and finally
pulled the same pistol minutes later in a darkened theater and attempted
to shoot arresting officers as they closed in.I guess I’ll never understand why it’s so hard for some people to accept reality.

2 comments:

Rob Johnson
said...

Hi Dale. I'm from the UK and find your work on the assassination really interesting. Is there a reason your animation doesn't extend to the fatal headshot? I can see a very brief section of it on your website, but was left wondering why it wasn't included in the Jennings film, or why the whole sequence doesn't feature on your site, with the same level of analysis? It would seem a really big step in disproving the conspiracy. Thanks.

The head shot sequence analysis was discussed in both the conclusion and FAQ sections of the website: http://www.jfkfiles.com. Jennings' reasons for not exploring it more during the 2003 ABC program was also explained in the FAQ section. I doubt that more analysis would convince those who believe a conspiracy was behind Oswald to abandon their beliefs.